arxiv:math/ v1 [math.pr] 21 Sep 2005

Transcription

1 arxiv:math/050947v [math.pr] 2 Sep 2005 CONGRUENCE PROPERTIES OF DEPTHS IN SOME RANDOM TREES SVANTE JANSON Abstract. Consider a random recusive tree with n vertices. We show that the number of vertices with even depth is asymptotically normal as n. The same is true for the number of vertices of depth divisible by m for m = 3, 4 or 5; in all four cases the variance grows linearly. On the other hand, for m 7, the number is not asymptotically normal, and the variance grows faster than linear in n. The case m = 6 is intermediate: the number is asymptotically normal but the variance is of order nlogn. This is a simple and striking example of a type of phase transition that has been observed by other authors in several cases. We prove, and perhaps explain, this non-intuitive behavious using a translation to a generalized Pólya urn. Similar results hold for a random binary search tree; now the number of vertices of depth divisible by m is asymptotically normal for m 8 but not for m 9, and the variance grows linearly in the first case both faster in the second. (There is no intermediate case.) In contrast, we show that for conditioned Galton Watson trees, including random labelled trees and random binary trees, there is no such phase transition: the number is asymptotically normal for every m.. Introduction Given a rooted tree T, let X (T) be the number of vertices of depth (i.e., of distance from the root). The sequence (X ) =0 is called the profile of the tree and has been studied for various types of random trees by many authors, see e.g. [, 7, 8, 4, 5, 6, 2, 30]. We will here study the congruence class of the depth modulo some given integer m 2. Thus, let X (m) (T) := k (mod m) X k(t) be the number of vertices of depth congruent to modulo m. For example, X (2) 0 (T) is the number of vertices of even depth. We further let X (m) (T) denote the vector ( (m) X 0 (T),...,X (m) m (T)). The purpose of this paper is to study the asymptotic distribution as n of the random vector X (m) (T n ) for some random trees T n with n vertices. For a random recursive tree (RRT), see Section 2 for definitions, we will show (Theorem 2.) that X (m) is asymptotically normal for m 6 Date: September 2, Mathematics Subect Classification. 60C05; 05C05.

2 2 SVANTE JANSON but not for m 7; furthermore, the variance grows linearly for m 5 but faster for m 6. For a random binary search tree (BST), the result is similar (Theorem 2.7): X (m) is asymptotically normal for m 8, but not for m 9; moreover, the variance grows linearly for m 8 but faster for larger m. In contrast, for a conditioned Galton Watson tree (CGWT), X (m) is asymptotically normal for every m (Theorem 2.2). Note that the typical depths are of the order logn in a RRT or BST, but n in a CGWT. There is thus more room for smoothing between the congruence classes in the latter case, which may explain the asymptotic normality in that case, but we see no intuitive explanation for the difference between small and large m for the RRT and BST. We do not claim that the variables X (m) have any importance in applications, but they provide a simple and surprising example of a type of phase transition that has been observed in several similar combinatorial situations. One well-known such example is random m-ary search trees, see Chern and Hwang []; see also e.g. Mahmoud and Pittel [3], Lew and Mahmoud [29], Fill and Kapur[7], Chauvin and Pouyanne [9]. Other examples are random quadtrees, see Chern, Fuchs and Hwang [0], and random fragmentation trees, see Dean and Maumdar [2] and Janson and Neininger [26]. We will use a translation into generalized Pólya urns; for such urns, there is a general theorem describes the phase transition in terms of the size of the real part of the second largest eigenvalue, see Athreya and Karlin [2] or Athreya and Ney [3, V.9]; see also Kesten and Stigum [27] and, for more details, [25]. The same type of phase transition in a related (and overlapping) setting is described in [23]. We hope that our simple example can help to illustrate this surprising and non-intuitive phenomenon. It provides also an illustration of the results in [25] in a simple concrete situation. We state the results in Section 2. Proofs are given in the following three sections, with one type of random trees in each. The proofs for RRT and BST in Sections 3 and 4 are very similar and uses generalized Pólya urns, while the proof for CGWT in Section 5 uses generating functions and singularity analysis. Finally, in Section 6 we show that the oscillations shown in the results for RRT and BST except for small m are genuine and not only an artefact of the proof or of the normalization. Acknowledgement. This research was mainly done during the workshop Probability theory on trees and analysis of algorithms at the Mathematisches Forschungsinstitut Oberwolfach in August I thank the participants, in particular Hsien-Kuei Hwang, for inspiring comments. 2. Definitions and results Let denote the m-dimensional vector (,...,). (We do not always distinguish between row and column vectors in our notation.) We will occasionally deal with complex random variables. A complex Gaussian variable isacomplexrandomvariableζ suchthatreζ andimζ are

3 CONGRUENCE PROPERTIES OF DEPTHS IN SOME RANDOM TREES 3 ointly Gaussian (i.e., normal). A complex Gaussian variable ζ is symmetric if and only if Eζ = Eζ 2 = 0; its distribution is then determined by the scale factor E ζ 2. See further [24, Section I.4]. The discrete Fourier transform on the group Z m = {0,...,m } is defined by f(k) = where ω = ω m := e 2πi/m. All limits below are as n. m =0 ω k f(), (2.) 2.. Random recursive trees. A random recursive tree (RRT) with n vertices is a random rooted tree obtained by starting with a single root and then adding n vertices one by one, each time oining the new vertex to a randomly chosen old vertex; the random choices are uniform and independent of each other. If the vertices are labelled,2,..., we thus obtain a tree where the labels increase along each branch as we travel from the root; the random recursive tree can also be defined as a (uniform) randomly chosen such labelled tree. (The distribution of a random recursive tree differs from the distribution of a uniform random labelled tree.) See also the survey [33]. We state the main results for RRT in the following theorem, and add various details in the remarks after it. Theorem 2.. Let T n be a random recursive tree with n vertices. Then, the following holds for X (m) = X (m) (T n ), as n. (i) If 2 m 5, then n /2( X (m) n m ) d N(0,Σ m ) (2.2) for a covariance matrix Σ m given explicitly in (2.5) (2.8). (ii) If m = 6, then (nlnn) /2( X (m) n m ) d N(0,Σ 6 ), where Σ 6 is given explicitly in (2.9). (iii) If m 7, let α = cos(2π/m) > /2 and β = sin(2π/m). Then n α( X (m) n ) m Re ( n iβ Wm ) a.s. 0, (2.3) for some complex random vector W m = ( Zm e 2πi/m) m =0, where Z m is a complex random variable. In particular, along any subsequence such that βlnn mod 2π γ for some γ [0,2π], n α( X (m) ointly in = 0,...,m. n m ) d Re ( e i(γ 2π/m) Zm ), (2.4)

4 4 SVANTE JANSON Remark 2.2. The covariance matrices Σ m in (i) and (ii) are given by Σ 2 = 2 Σ 3 = 8 Σ 4 = 48 Σ 5 = 25 Σ 6 = 36 ( ) (2.5) 2 2 (2.6) (2.7) (2.8) (2.9) Note that the matrices Σ m are circulant, i.e. invariant under a cyclic shift of both rows and columns. In particular, X (m) has the same asymptotic distribution for every (when m 6). Remark 2.3. The distribution of Zm = Z in (iii) is determined by the equalities in distribution Z d = m 2 Wω Z, (2.0) Z d = U ω (Z +ωz ), (2.) where ω = α+βi = e 2πi/m, Z d = Z, W Exp(), U U(0,), and W, Z, U, Z, Z are independent, together with EZ =.

5 CONGRUENCE PROPERTIES OF DEPTHS IN SOME RANDOM TREES 5 The moments of Z and Z are all finite, and can be obtained recursively from (2.) and (2.0) together with EZ =. In particular, EZ =, E Z = EZ 2 = 2 2 ω, E Z 2 = E Z 2 = 2α 2α, E Z 2 = EZ 3 = 6(+ω) (3 ω 2 )(2 ω), E Z 3 = 2 mγ(+ω), 8 m 2 (2 ω)γ(+2ω), 8α m 2 (2α )Γ(+2α), 48(+ω) m 3 (3 ω 2 )(2 ω)γ(+3ω). Remark 2.4. It follows from [23, Section 2] that all moments of the variablesintheorem2.stay boundedasn, andthusmomentconvergence holds in (i) and (ii) and for convergent subsequences in (iii). In particular, the variance of each X (m) is of order n for m 5, but larger for m 6. Remark 2.5. The covariance matrix Σ m has rank m when m 5, while Σ 6 has rank 2 only. (Full rank is impossible because all row sums are 0, reflecting the fact that the total number of vertices is non-random.) Remark 2.6. The results for the RRT T n become simpler if we state them in terms of the discrete Fourier transform X (m) = ( X(m) (k) ) m defined by 0 (2.). (See also [23], where the proof is based on this Fourier transform.) Clearly, X(m) (0) = X(m) = T n = n is deterministic. For 2 m 5, Theorem 2. implies (and is equivalent to) the oint convergence n /2 X(m) (k) d V k, k =,...,m, (2.2) where V k are complex (ointly) Gaussian variables such that, for k,l {,...,m }, using (3.) below, (i) V m k = V k, (ii) EV k = 0, (iii) E(V k V l ) = 0 when l m k, (iv) E V k 2 = 2Reωm k = 2cos(2πk/m). It follows that further: (v) If k = m/2 (and thus ωm k = ), then V k = V k is a symmetric real Gaussian variable. (vi) If k m/2, then EVk 2 = 0 and thus V k is a symmetric complex Gaussian variable. (vii) The Gaussian variables V k, k m/2, are independent. Note that the oint distribution of V,...,V m is determined by (iv) (vii) together with (i).

6 6 SVANTE JANSON Similarly, for m = 6, (nlnn) /2 X(m) (k) d V k, k =,...,5, where now, however, only V and V 5 = V are non-zero; V is a symmetric complex Gaussian variable with E V 2 =. Finally, for m 7, we have while n ωm X (m) (k) a.s. 0 for k = 2,...,m 2. n ωm X (m) () a.s. m 2 Z m, (2.3) 2.2. Binary search trees. A Binary search tree (BST) is constructed from a sequence x,...,x n of distinct real numbers as follows, see e.g. [28, Section 6.2.2]. If n = 0, the tree is empty. Otherwise, start with a root. (In computer applications, x is stored in the root.) Then construct recursively two subtrees of the root by the same procedure applied to two subsequences of x,...,x n : the left subtree from the x i with x i < x and the right subtree from the x i with x i > x. The number of vertices in the tree is thus n, and each vertex corresponds to an x i. A random BST is obtained by this construction applied to a sequence x,...,x n in random order. (Since only the order properties of x,...,x n matter, we can let them be, for example, either a random permutation of,...,norni.i.d.randomvariables withacommoncontinuousdistribution.) It is easily seen that a random BST can be grown by adding vertices one by one according to a Markov process similar to the definition of the RRT: Given a binary tree with n vertices, there are n+ possible positions for a new vertex, and we choose one of them at random (uniformly). Theorem 2.7. Let T n be a random binary search tree with n vertices. Then, the following holds for X (m) = X (m) (T n ), as n. (i) If 2 m 8, then n /2( X (m) n m ) d N(0,Σ m ) for a covariance matrix Σ m given explicitly in Remark 2.8. (ii) If m 9, let α = 2cos(2π/m) > /2 and β = 2sin(2π/m). Then n α( X (m) n m ) Re ( n iβ Wm ) a.s. 0, (2.4) for some complex random vector W m = ( Zm e 2πi/m) m =0, where Z m is a complex random variable. In particular, along any subsequence such that βlnn mod 2π γ for some γ [0,2π], n α( X (m) ointly in = 0,...,m. n m ) d Re ( e i(γ 2π/m) Zm ), (2.5)

7 CONGRUENCE PROPERTIES OF DEPTHS IN SOME RANDOM TREES 7 Remark 2.8. The covariance matrices Σ m in (i) are circulant and explicitly given by the following first rows: m = 2 : 28 (, ), m = 3 : 45 (2,, ), m = 4 : 336 (7, 3,, 3), m = 5 : 275 (6,, 9, 9,), m = 6 : 260 (89,23, 37, 6, 37,23), m = 7 : 637 (62,27, 5, 43, 43, 5,27), m = 8 : 344 (269,65,, 7, 235, 7,,65). Remark 2.9. The distribution of Zm = Z in (ii) is determined by the equalities in distribution Z d = m 2 (2ω )W2ω Z, (2.6) Z d = ωu 2ω (Z +Z ), (2.7) where ω = ω m = e 2πi/m, Z d = Z, W Exp(), U U(0,), and W, Z, U, Z, Z are independent, together with EZ =. Again, the moments of Z and Z are all finite, and can be obtained recursively from (2.7) and (2.6) together with EZ =. In particular, EZ =, E Z 2 = m(2ω )Γ(2ω), EZ 2 2ω 2 = 4ω 2ω 2, E Z 2 = E Z 2 2 = 4α 3, E Z 2 = EZ 3 = 6ω 5 (3ω ω 3 )(4ω ω 2 ), E Z 3 = 4 m 2 (2ω ) 2 Γ(4ω ) EZ2, 4 m 2 (5 4α)Γ(4α ) E Z 2, 8 m 3 (2ω ) 3 Γ(6ω 2) EZ3. Remark 2.0. The proofs in [23, Section 2] apply to this situation too and show that all moments of the variables in Theorem 2.7 stay bounded as n, and thus moment convergence holds in (i) and for convergent subsequences in (ii). In particular, the variance of each X (m) is of order n for m 8, but larger for m 9. Remark 2.. Just as for the RRT case in Remark 2.6, the results become simpler if we state them in terms of the Fourier transform X (m). Clearly, again X (m) (0) = T n = n. Further, for 2 m 8, (2.2) holds, where V k are complex Gaussian variables satisfying (i) (iii) and (v) (vii) in Remark 2.6 together with (iv ) E V k 2 = 3 4cos(2πk/m).

8 8 SVANTE JANSON Finally, for m 9, n (2ωm ) X(m) () a.s. m 2 Z m, (2.8) while n (2ωm ) X(m) (k) a.s. 0 for k = 2,...,m Conditioned Galton Watson trees. A conditioned Galton Watson tree (CGWT) with n vertices is a random tree obtained as the family tree of a Galton Watson process conditioned on a given total population of n. (See e.g. [, 3] for details.) The Galton Watson process is defined using an offspring distribution; let ξ denotes a random variable with this distribution. We assume, as usual, Eξ = (the Galton Watson process is critical) and 0 < σ 2 = Varξ <. We assume further, for technical reasons, that Ee aξ < forsomea > 0. (Equivalently, theprobabilitygeneratingfunction ϕ(z) := Ez ξ is analytic in a disc with radius greater than.) It is well-known [] that the conditioned Galton Watson trees are the same as the simply generated trees [32]. Many combinatorially interesting random trees are of this type, with different choices of ξ, for example labelled trees (ξ Po(), σ 2 = ); ordered (=plane) trees (P(ξ = k) = 2 k, σ 2 = 2); binary trees (ξ Bi(2,/2), σ 2 = /2); complete binary trees (P(ξ = 0) = P(ξ = 2) = /2, σ 2 = ). It has been shown by Drmota and Gittenberger [4] that the profile of a CGWT converges, after normalization, to the local time of a Brownian excursion. For the congruence classes we have a simpler result. As in many other results, see e.g. [, 4], different choices of ξ only affects ascaling factor in the limit result. Theorem 2.2. Let T n be a random conditioned Galton Watson tree with n vertices, with the offspring distribution given by a random variable ξ such that Eξ =, σ 2 := Varξ > 0 and Ee aξ < for some a > 0. Then, for any fixed m 2, the following holds for X (m) = X (m) (T n ) as n, n /2( X (m) n m ) d N(0,Σ m ) for a covariance matrix Σ m = (σ i ) given explicitly by σ i,i+k = σ2 2m 2 ( m 2 6k(m k) ) for 0 i m, 0 k m and i+k taken modulo m.

9 CONGRUENCE PROPERTIES OF DEPTHS IN SOME RANDOM TREES 9 Remark 2.3. The covariance matrices Σ m are circulant. For small m, they are explicitly given by the following first rows: m = 2 : σ 2 6 (, ), m = 3 : σ 2 27 (2,, ), m = 4 : σ 2 64 (5,, 3, ), m = 5 : σ 2 25 (2,0,,,0), m = 6 : σ (35,5, 3, 9, 3,5). Remark 2.4. It follows from the proof in Section 5 that moment convergence holds in Theorem 2.2. In particular, the variance of each X (m) is of order n for every m. Remark 2.5. Note the curious fact that the asymptotic variance of X (m), nσ 2 ( m 2 )/2, is almost independent of m. Remark 2.6. For the Fourier transform X (m), we again have X (m) (0) = T n = n. Further, for any m 2, (2.2) holds, where V k are complex Gaussian variables satisfying (i) (iii) and (v) (vii) in Remark 2.6 together with (iv ) E V k 2 = ωm k = 2 2 2cos(2πk/m). Remark 2.7. As a comparison to the results above, suppose that we construct X (m) by randomly throwing n balls into m urns 0,...,m, and counting the number of balls in each urn. Then X (m) Bi(n,/m), and the central limit theorem shows that n /2( X (m) n m ) d N(0,Σ m ) with Σ = (m δ i m 2 ) i. Moreover, the Fourier transform X (m) is a sum of n i.i.d. complex random variables and the central limit theorem shows that (2.2) holds, wherev k arecomplex Gaussian variables satisfying (i) (iii) and (v) (vii) in Remark 2.6 together with (iv ) E V k 2 =. It follows from the formulas above that the asymptotic variance of X (m) (for any ) is smaller for the depths in the random trees that we consider than for a random assignment of labels when m is small, but not when m is large. More precisely, it is smaller for RRT when m 5 and for BST when m 7; for CGWT, it is smaller when m < 2/σ 2. (Thus, if σ 2 > 4, then the asymptotic variance for CGWT is always larger than for a random labelling.) 3. Random recursive trees The definition of RRT in Section 2 shows immediately that the distribution of depths modulo m is given by the following generalized Pólya urn:

10 0 SVANTE JANSON The urn contains balls with labels 0,...,m, representing the depths modulo m of the vertices. Start with a single ball with label 0 in the urn. Then, repeatedly, draw a ball (at random) from the urn, replace it, and if the drawn ball had label, add a new ball with label + (mod m). This urn was studied briefly in [25, Example 7.9], see also [23, Example 6.3]. We repeat the analysis in [25] with more details. Using the notation there we have, with the indices in {0,...,m } and addition taken modulo m, ξ i = δ i+,, a =, A = (ξ i ) m i,=0 = (δ i,+) m i,=0. The matrix A is circulant and corresponds to a convolution operator in l 2 (Z m ); hence, A is diagonalized by the characters of the group Z m. More precisely, let ω = ω m := e 2πi/m. Then A has left eigenvectors u = (ω k ) m k=0 and right eigenvectors v = (m ω k ) m k=0 with eigenvalues ω, for = 0,...,m. Thus, Ahasmsimpleeigenvalues, andthedominanteigenvalue λ is ω 0 =. (Note that the corresponding eigenvectors u 0 = and v 0 = m are denoted u and v in [25].) We have chosen the normalizations such that (u ) and (v ) are dual bases; moreover u 0 and v 0 satisfy the normalizations in [25, (2.2) (2.3)]. The eigenvalues with second largest real part are λ 2 = ω and λ 3 = ω. Since Reλ 2 = cos(2π/m) < /2 when m 5, Reλ 2 = cos(2π/m) = /2 when m = 6, and Reλ 2 = cos(2π/m) > /2 when m 7, the trichotomy in Theorem 2. follows from [25, Theorems ]. (The conditions (A) (A6) there are easily verified, see [25, pp. 80 8].) More precisely, in Case (i), the convergence to a normal distribution follows by [25, Theorems 3.22]. To find the covariance matrices Σ m, we use [25, Lemma 5.3(iii)] (or [25, Lemma 5.3(i) or (ii), Lemma 5.4 and Lemma 5.5]). We have D = m I and thus u Du k = m u u k = 0 unless k (mod m), while u m k Du k = u k Du k =. (We use the notation in [25] that u v := u t v, without complex conugation.) Hence, Σ m = m = 2Reωm v v, (3.) and a straightforward evaluation yields the matrices (2.5) (2.8). (Note that Σ m is rational also for m = 5, although Reω 5 = ( 5 )/4 is not. This is easily explained by Galois theory.) The case m = 2, with A = ( 0 0 ), is a special case of the so-called Friedman s urn [20] (studied already by Bernstein [4]), and the result follows alternatively directly from Bernstein [4], [5] or Freedman [9]; see also [25, Example 3.27]. In Case (ii), m = 6, we similarly find by [25, Lemma 5.3(iv)] which yields (2.9). Σ 6 = v v +v 5 v 5 = 6 2( 2Reω k 6 ),k,

11 CONGRUENCE PROPERTIES OF DEPTHS IN SOME RANDOM TREES In Case (iii), (2.3) follows from [25, Theorem 3.24], with d = 0 and λ 2 = ω m = α+iβ. Letusnowdenotetheeigenvectors u andv belongingto ω by u ω and v ω. Then [25, Theorem 3.24] further shows that W m belongs to the linear span E ω of v ω = (m ω ) ; hence W m = ( Zm ω ) m =0 as asserted for some complex random Z m := m u ω W m. By [25, Theorem 3.26], (2.0) holds with Z = u ω W ω, and W ω as in [25, Theorem 3.]. Recall that we start the urn with a single ball with label 0. Let, as in [25, Theorem 3.9], W ω,i be the limit random variable corresponding to W ω if we instead start with a single ball of type i. By symmetry, W ω,i is obtained from W ω,0 = W ω by a cyclic shift of the components, and thus Z i := u ω W ω,i = ω i Z. By [25, Theorem 3.9(ii)], W ω,i d = U ω (W ω,i +ωw ω,i+ ) (3.2) with W ω,i+ distributed as W ω,i+ and independent of W ω,i. Consequently, Z i d = U ω (Z i +Z i+) d = U ω (Z i +ωz i), with Z i, Z i+, Z i independent, and taking i = 0 we obtain (2.). Moreover, EZ = u ω0 = by [25, Theorem 3.0]. Conversely, (2.) implies (3.2) with W ω,i = ω i Zv ω, and thus [25, Theorem 3.9(iii)] implies that the distribution of Z is determined by (2.) and EZ. The distribution of Z then is determined by (2.0). For higher moments of Z, we take moments in (2.). For example, EZ 2 = EU 2ω E(Z +ωz ) 2 = (+2ω) ( (+ω 2 )EZ 2 +2ω(EZ) 2), which, using EZ =, gives EZ 2 = 2/(2 ω) after rearrangement. We leave the corresponding calculations for E Z 2 and EZ 3 to the reader. See also [25, Theorem 3.0]. The formulas for moments of Z then follows from (2.0), using EW z = Γ(+z) when Rez > ; see also [25, Theorem 3.26] and [23, Section 2]. 4. Binary search trees To describe the profile of the random BST in terms of an urn model, we make a simple transformation. A BST with n vertices has n + possible positions for a new vertex. We augment the tree by adding n + new vertices at these positions; the n+ new vertices are called external and the n original vertices are called internal. Thus every internal vertex has two children, and every external vertex has none. Thus, (X ) =0 is now the profile of the internal vertices. We similarly define (Y ) =0 as the profile of the external vertices, and note that, since every internal vertex has exactly two children, 2X = X +Y,.

12 2 SVANTE JANSON For = 0 we instead have X 0 +Y 0 = X 0 =. (Recall that the root has no parent.) Passing to congruence classes modulo m we thus have, for every, 2X (m) X(m) = Y (m) δ 0. (4.) The growth of the augmented tree can be described as follows: Choose an external vertex at random, convert it to an internal vertex and add two new external vertices as its children. The distribution of depths for external vertices modulo m is thus given by a generalized Pólya urn similar to the one in Section 3, with the difference that when we draw a ball with label, we remove it and add two balls with label +. (We start with 2 balls with label ; alternatively, we start with a single ball with label 0 and make one more draw.) The matrix A is now (2δ i,+ δ i, ) m i,=0, again with index addition modulo m. The eigenvectors are the same u and v as in Section 3, but the correspondingeigenvalue is now 2ω. Inparticular, thelargest eigenvalue (i.e., the one with largest real part) is λ = (as before), and the second largest are λ 2 = 2ω and λ 2, with real part Reλ 2 = 2cos(2π/m). Hence, the condition Reλ 2 < /2 becomes cos(2π/m) < 3/4, which holds for m 8, while for m 9 we have cos(2π/m) > 3/4 and thus Reλ 2 > /2. We now obtain, exactly as in Section 3, normal convergence of Y (m) = (Y (m) 0,...,Y (m) m ) when m 8. More precisely, by [25, Theorem 3.22 and Lemma 5.3(iii) or Lemmas 5.3(ii) and 5.4], (2.2) holds for Y (m) with Σ m = m = 2ω 2 m 3 4Reω v v 5 4Reω = 3 4Reω v v. (4.2) = Similarly, by [25, Theorem 3.24], when m 9, (2.3) and (2.4) hold for Y (m), for some Z m and W m = ( Zm ω ) m. Further, by [25, Theorems 3.26, 3.9 =0 and 3.0], Z d = m 2 W2ω Zm, (4.3) where Z satisfies (2.7) and EZ =. To obtain the results for X (m), we use (4.). It is convenient to solve this convolution equation by taking the Fourier transform, which yields, for all k, (2ω k ) X (m) (k) = Ŷ (m) (k). (4.4) In the case m 8, we have in analogy with Remark 2.6, Ŷ (m) (0) = n+ and the oint convergence n /2 Ŷ (m) (k) d V k, k =,...,m, (4.5) where V k are complex Gaussian variables satisfying (i) (iii) and (v) (vii) in Remark 2.6 together with (iv ) E V k 2 = 2ωk m 2 3 4Reω k m = 5 4Reωk m 3 4Reω k m = 5 4cos(2πk/m) 3 4cos(2πk/m).

13 CONGRUENCE PROPERTIES OF DEPTHS IN SOME RANDOM TREES 3 It follows immediately from (4.4) and (4.5) that n /2 X(m) (k) d (2ω k ) V k, k =,...,m, (4.6) which yields the statement in Remark 2. (for m 8), with the meaning of V k changed. Similarly, for m 9, we have, with λ := 2ω, in analogy with (2.3), n λ Ŷ (m) () a.s. m Z 2 m, and thus n λ X(m) () = n λ λ Ŷ (m) ()+o() a.s. λ m 2 Z m, while n λ X(m) (k) a.s. 0 for k = 2,...,m 2. We change the meaning of Z m (replacing Z m by λ Z m ) and write this as (2.8), simultaneously changing (4.3) to (2.6). Theorem 2.7 now follows by taking the inverse Fourier transform. When m 8, we obtain (2.2) with Σ m = m = 3 4Reωm v v, (4.7) which gives the explicit values in Remark 2.8 (with some help of Maple). Remark 4.. The covariance matrices in (4.2) for the case of external vertices are circulant and explicitly given by the following first rows: m = 2 : 28 (9, 9), m = 3 : 45 (4, 7, 7), m = 4 : 336 (97, 27, 43, 27), m = 5 : 275 (76, 9, 29, 29, 9), m = 6 : 260 (353,, 09, 57, 09,), m = 7 : 637 (202,4, 43, 99, 99, 43,4), m = 8 : 344 (685,309, 43, 363, 49, 363, 43,309). 5. Conditioned Galton Watson trees For Galton Watson trees, we use generating functions and singularity analysis. See [6] for similar arguments. Given a tree T, we define its profile polynomial by S(x) = S(x;T) := v T x d(v) = x X (T). (5.) We will first find the asymptotic distribution of S(x;T n ) for x on the unit circle (excluding the trivial case x = ). Note that S(x) for x = is the Fourier transform of the sequence (X ) as a function on Z.

14 4 SVANTE JANSON Letting T be a random Galton Watson tree, we define the generating functions, for k 0, k ) F k (t;x,...,x k ) := E (t T S(x i ;T ). (5.2) Here t and x,...,x k are complex numbers. (It is also possible to regard F k as a formal power series, but we will need analytic functions.) We regard x,...,x k as fixed and consider F k as a function of t. We consider only x i with x i ; then S(x i ;T ) T and the expectation in (5.2) exists at least for t <. Thus (5.2) defines F k as an analytic function of t in the unit disc t <. We will soon see that it can be continued to a larger domain. Let D 0 be the degree of the root. If we condition on D 0 = q 0, then the random tree T consists of the root plus q branches T,...,T q that are independentand have thesame distributionas T. Further, T = + q T and S(x;T ) = + q = xs(x;t ), and thus, summing over all sequences I 0,...,I q of disoint (possibly empty) subsets of {,...,k} with q I = {,...,k}, k S(x i ;T ) = q x i S(x i ;T ). i= =i I Consequently, I 0,...,I q k ) E (t T S(x i ;T ) D 0 = q = E q ( t t ) T x i S(x i ;T ) i= I 0,...,I q = i I = t ( ) q F I (t;{x i, i I }). I 0,...,I q i= i/ I 0 x i The terms in the latter sum do not depend on the order of I,...,I q. Thus, if I 0,...,I l denotes the sum over such sequences I 0,...,I l with I,...,I l nonempty and in, say, lexicographic order, then, with q l := q(q ) (q l+), k ) E (t T S(x i ;T ) D 0 = q i= = t k * ( q l I 0,...,I l l=0 i/ I 0 x i = ) l F I (t;{x i, i I })F 0 (t) q l. (5.3) = Now take the expectation, i.e. multiply by P(D 0 = q) and sum over q. We d have, for z < at least, since D 0 = ξ and thus Ez D 0 = ϕ(z), q l z q l P(D 0 = q) = E ( D l 0 zd 0 l ) = ϕ (l) (z), q l

15 CONGRUENCE PROPERTIES OF DEPTHS IN SOME RANDOM TREES 5 and thus (5.3) yields F k (t;x,...,x k ) = t k * ( ϕ (l) (F 0 (t)) I 0,...,I l l=0 i/ I 0 x i ) l F I (t;{x i, i I }). In particular, k = 0 yields the well-known formula F 0 (t) = tϕ(f 0 (t)). The next two cases are F (t;x) = tϕ(f 0 (t))+tϕ (F 0 (t))xf (t;x), F 2 (t;x,y) = tϕ(f 0 (t))+tϕ (F 0 (t)) ( xf (t;x)+yf (t;y)+xyf 2 (t;x,y) ) = +tϕ (F 0 (t))xyf (t;x)f (t;y). We thus have, recalling tϕ(f 0 (t)) = F 0 (t), F (t;x) = F 0 (t) xtϕ (F 0 (t)), (5.4) F 2 (t;x,y) = ( xytϕ (F 0 (t)) ) ( F 0 (t)+tϕ (F 0 (t)) ( xf (t;x)+yf (t;y) ) and in general F k (t;x,...,x k ) = t l=0 ( t ( k i= ) x i )ϕ (F 0 (t)) k ** ( ϕ (l) (F 0 (t)) I 0,...,I l i/ I 0 x i ) +tϕ (F 0 (t))xyf (t;x)f (t;y), (5.5) ) l F I (t;{x i, i I }), (5.6) where means with the single term with l = and I = k omitted. This gives recursively an explicit formula for each F k (t;x,...,x k ) as a rational function of x,...,x k and tϕ (l) (F 0 (t)), 0 l k. We say, see [8, Chapter VI], that a -domain is a domain of the type {z : z < +ε, arg(z ) > π/2 δ} for some (small) positive ε and δ, and that a function is -analytic if it is analytic in some -domain, or can be extended to such a function. Suppose for simplicity in the sequel that ξ is aperiodic. (The periodic case is similar with standard modifications as in [8, Chapter VI.7]; we omit the details.) Then, by a standard result in singularity analysis, see e.g. [8, Proposition VI.], F 0 (t) is -analytic, with F 0 (t) = 2/σ 2 ( t) /2 +O( t) as t. (5.7) (Here and below, we consider only t in a suitable -domain.) It follows that in a (possibly smaller) -domain, F 0 (t) < and hence ϕ (F 0 (t)) < =

16 6 SVANTE JANSON ϕ () =. Further, ϕ (F 0 (t)) = +ϕ () ( F 0 (t) ) +O ( F 0 (t) ) 2 = 2σ( t) /2 +O( t), (5.8) and it follows easily that tϕ (F 0 (t)) < in a -domain. Hence, for every fixed x with x, ( xtϕ (F 0 (t)) ) is -analytic, with ( xtϕ (F 0 (t)) ) = {2 /2 σ ( t) /2 +O(), if x =, O(), if x. (5.9) Lemma 5.. For k and any complex x,...,x k with x i and x i, F k (t;x,...,x k ) is -analytic (as a function of t), with F k (t;x,...,x k ) = a k (x,...,x k )( t) (k )/2 +O ( ( t) (k 2)/2), (5.0) where a (x) = /( x), and for k 2, a k (x,...,x k ) = 0 if x x k, while if x x k =, a k (x,...,x k ) = 2 3/2 σ a I (x i : i I)a k I (x i : i / I). (5.) I {,...,k} In particular, when x =, a 2 (x, x) = 2 /2 σ x 2. Proof. The -analyticity follows by (5.6) and induction, using the results ust shown. For k =, the expansion (5.0) follows from (5.4), (5.7) and (5.8). Similarly, (5.0) for k = 2 follows from (5.5) together with (5.7), (5.8) and (5.9); this also yields a 2 (x,y) = 0 if xy and for xy =, using also ϕ () = σ 2, a 2 (x,y) = 2 /2 σ ( F 0 ()+xa (x)+ya (y)+σ 2 xya (x)a (y) ), which equals 2 /2 σ x 2 because now x = y = and y = x and thus xa (x)+ya (y) = x x + y ( x ) y = 2Re =. x For k 3 we argue similarly. By induction, all terms in the sum in (5.6) are O ( ( t) (k 2)/2). The result when x x k follows immediately by (5.9). Assumenowx x k =. If I = k, theni = {,...,k}\x p forsome p, and thus i I x i = x p ; hence by induction F k (t;{x i : i I }) = O ( ( t) (k 3)/2). The leading terms in (5.6) are thus those with l = 2 and I 0 =, I 2 = {,...,k}\i, which proves the claim, including (5.), by another application of (5.9). (Note the factor /2 because we assume that I and I 2 are in order, but not necessarily I and its complement.) We next solve the recursion (5.). Let N(x,...,x k ) be the number of pairingsofx,...,x k intok/2pairsofthetype{x, x}. (ThusN(x,...,x k ) = 0 if k is odd.)

17 CONGRUENCE PROPERTIES OF DEPTHS IN SOME RANDOM TREES 7 Lemma 5.2. Let k 2. Suppose that x,...,x k {x C : x = but x }. Then a k (x,...,x k ) = Γ( (k )/2 ) 2πσ N(x,...,x k ) k i= σ x i. Proof. For k = 2, the result follows directly from Lemma 5.. For k 3, we use induction. The result is trivial if x x k. Hence, weassumex x k = anduse(5.). First, notethat it sufficestoconsider I with I even. In fact, if I is odd and I 3, then N I (x i : i I) = 0, and thus a I (x i : i I) = 0 by induction. If I =, then I = {x p } for some p. Since i/ I x i = x p, we have N k I (x i : i / I) = 0, and thus by induction a k I (x i : i / I) = 0. Similarly, we may assume that k I is even. The result thus holds when k is odd (with a k (x,...,x k ) = 0). Now let k be even, k = 2l with l 2. We use induction on the right hand side of (5.). Say that a pairing of x,...,x k is good if each pair consist of two conugate numbers. Note that N I (x i : i I)N k I (x i : i / I) equals the number of pairs (α,β) where α is a good pairing of (x i : i I) and β is a good pairing of (x i : i / I). Each such pair (α,β) defines a good pairing of x,...,x k, and conversely, each good pairing of x,...,x k splits into good pairings α and β in 2 l 2 ways: ( l ) ways with I = 2 for each =,...,l. Consequently, (5.) yields, l ( ) l a k (x,...,x k ) = 2 3/2 σ N(x,...,x k ) = = Γ( /2)Γ(l /2) 2πσ 2 To complete the induction step, it is now sufficient to verify l ( ) l Γ( /2)Γ(l /2) = 4 πγ(l /2), =0 k i= σ x i. for l 2. This is an immediate consequence of the binomial convolution l ( ) l l Γ( /2) Γ(l /2) Γ( /2)Γ(l /2) = l!! (l )! = l! =0 l ( )( ) ( ) /2 /2 ( ) l Γ( /2) 2 = l!( ) l Γ( /2) 2 = 0, l l =0 when l 2, since the terms with = 0 and = l both are Γ( /2)Γ(l /2) = 2 πγ(l /2).

18 8 SVANTE JANSON Lemma 5.3. Let k. Suppose that x,...,x k {x C : x = but x }. Then E ( S(x ;T n ) S(x k ;T n ) ) ( k σ ) = N(x,...,x k ) n k/2 +O ( n (k )/2). x i Proof. By (5.4), i= E ( S(x ;T n ) S(x k ;T n ) ) = [tn ]F k (t;x,...,x k ) P( T = n) = [tn ]F k (t;x,...,x k ) [t n. ]F 0 (t) Standard singularity analysis see e.g. [8, Chapter VI], and (5.0) yield, for k 2, [t n ]F k (t;x,...,x k ) = a k(x,...,x k ) Γ ( (k )/2 ) n(k 3)/2 +O ( n (k 4)/2), while for k = we get [t n ]F (t;x) = O ( n 3/2). Similarly, (5.7) yields, as is well-known, [t n ]F 0 (t) = 2πσ n 3/2 +O ( n 5/2). The result follows from these formulas and Lemma 5.2. We can now identify the asymptotic moments and thus the asymptotic distribution of S(x;T n ). Theorem 5.4. Let U(x) be a family of complex Gaussian random variables, defined for x = but x, such that (i) U(x) is symmetric complex Gaussian when Imx 0, with E U(x) 2 = / x 2 ; (ii) U(x) is symmetric real Gaussian when Imx = 0 (i.e., when x = ), with E U(x) 2 = / x 2 ; (iii) U( x) = U(x); (iv) the variables U(x), Imx 0, are independent. Then, for the CGWT, S(x;T n )/ n d σu(x), ointly for all such x. Proof. Note that the assumptions imply that EU(x)U(y) = / x 2 if xy = (and thus y = x), but EU(x)U(y) = 0 otherwise. By Lemma 5.3 and the formula [24, Theorem.28] for oint moments of Gaussian variables (known as Wick s theorem), n k/2 E ( S(x ;T n ) S(x k ;T n ) ) σ k E ( U(x ) U(x k ) ). Replacing one or several x i by their conugates, we see that the same holds if we replace some S and U by their conugates. Hence the result holds by the method of moments (applied to the real and imaginary parts).

19 CONGRUENCE PROPERTIES OF DEPTHS IN SOME RANDOM TREES 9 Proof of Theorem 2.2. As remarked above, for any tree T, the numbers S(x;T) for x = form the Fourier transform of the sequence (X (T)). It follows that the discrete Fourier transform X (m) of X (m) (T) equals the vector (S(ω k ;T)) m k=0, where ω = ω m, cf. (2.) and (5.). Hence, by Fourier inversion, X (T) = m m k=0 ω k S(ω k ;T). Theorem 5.4 thus implies, since trivially S(;T n ) = n, n /2( X (T n ) n m ) d Z := σ m ω k U(ω k ), m ointly for all. Since the variables U(ω k ) are ointly (complex) Gaussian, the variables Z are too; moreover, each Z is real. Clearly, EZ = 0, and the covariance matrix is given by k= E(Z i Z ) = E(Z i Z ) = σ2 m m 2 ω ( i)k E U(ω k ) 2 k= = σ2 m m 2 ω ( i)k ω k 2. (5.2) To evaluate this sum, define a function f on Z m = {0,...,m } by f() = (m )/2. Then its Fourier transform is m f(k) = =0 ( m 2 k= ) ω k = m ω k, k 0, while f(0) = 0. Let further g := f ˇf on Z m, i.e. g() = i Z m f( + i)f(i). Then ĝ(k) = f(k) 2 = m 2 ω k 2, k 0, and thus, by Fourier inversion again, m k= m ω ( i)k ω k 2 = m 2 k=0 ω ( i)k ĝ(k) = m g(i ). Hence, by (5.2), E(Z i Z ) = σ 2 m 3 g(i ). It remains only to evaluate g. For 0 < m, g() = m i=0 = m m2 2 ( +i)i+ m i=m m (m ). 2 ( m ( +i m)i m 2 ) 2

20 20 SVANTE JANSON 6. Oscillations In Case (iii) of Theorem 2. (m 7), we do not have convergence in distribution: the sequence of random vectors n α( X (m) n m ), n =,2,..., is tight and thus suitable subsequences converge as is shown explicitly in (2.4), but different subsequences may have different limits, and thus n α( X (m) 0 n m ), for example, does not have alimitingdistribution. Indeed, suppose that n α( X (m) 0 n m ) d V, say. Then, by (2.4), Re(e iγ Zm ) d = V for every γ [0,2π]. In particular, Re(e iγ E Z m ) = ERe(e iγ Zm ) = EV is independent of γ [0,2π], which is a contradicion because E Z m 0 by Remark 2.3. Nevertheless, it is conceivable (although implausible) that X (m) 0 has a limiting distribution if we choose the norming constants carefully, i.e. that a n (X (m) d 0 b n ) V for some non-degenerate V and real constants a n > 0 and b n. It then would follow from (2.4) that Re(e iγ Zm ) = d a γ V +b γ for every γ [0,2π] and some real constants a γ 0 and b γ, see e.g. [22, Section 9.2]. In other words, Re(e iγ Zm ) would have a distribution of the same type for every γ, except when it is degenerate. To rule this out, we show a general result. Proposition 6.. Let Z be a complex random variable such that E Z 3 <. Suppose that there exists a random variable V and, for every γ [0,2π], some real constants a γ 0 and b γ such that Re ( e iγ Z ) d = aγ V + b γ. Then either (i) Z d = aw + b for some real random variable W and some complex constants a and b, and thus E(Z EZ) 2 = E Z EZ 2 ; or (ii) E(Z EZ) 3 = E(Z EZ) 2 (Z EZ) = 0. Proof. If all a γ = 0, then Re ( e iγ (Z EZ) ) = 0 a.s. for every γ, and it follows by the Cramér Wold device that Z = EZ a.s., a special case of (i). Thus assume that some a γ > 0. Then E V 3 <. By replacing Z by Z EZ and V by V EV (changing b γ accordingly), we may assume that EZ = EV = 0, and thus b γ = 0. If V = 0 a.s., then, by the Cramér Wold device again, Z = 0 a.s., and (i) holds. Assume thus EV 2 > 0; rescaling V we may assume EV 2 =. Define We have and thus X γ := Re ( e iγ Z ) d = aγ V, Z γ := 2e iγ X γ = e 2iγ Z + Z. EZ 2 γ = 4e 2iγ EX 2 γ = 4e 2iγ a 2 γ, EZ 3 γ = 8e 3iγ EX 3 γ = 8e 3iγ a 3 γ EV 3, ( ) EZ 3 2 γ = (EV 3 ) 2( EZγ 2 ) 3. (6.)

21 CONGRUENCE PROPERTIES OF DEPTHS IN SOME RANDOM TREES 2 On the other hand, EZ 2 γ = E ( e 2iγ Z + Z ) 2 = e 4iγ EZ 2 +2e 2iγ E Z 2 +E Z 2, (6.2) EZ 3 γ = e 6iγ EZ 3 +3e 4iγ E(Z 2 Z)+3e 2iγ E(Z Z 2 )+E Z 3. (6.3) Hence, EZ 2 γ andez 3 γ arepolynomials p 2 ( e 2iγ ) andp 3 ( e 2iγ ) ine 2iγ of degrees at most 2 and 3. By (6.), p 3 (z) 2 = (EV 3 ) 2 p 2 (z) 3 (6.4) for every z with z =, and thus for every complex z. If EV 3 = 0, then EZγ 3 = 0 by (6.) and thus (ii) holds by (6.3). Suppose now EV 3 0. If EZ 2 = 0, then p 2 (z) has degree or 0 by (6.2). Degree is impossible by (6.4), and thus E Z 2 = 0 by (6.2) so Z = 0 a.s., and both (i) and (ii) hold. Finally, if EV 3 0 and EZ 2 0, then (6.4) implies that p 2 has a double root, so its discriminant (E Z 2 ) 2 EZ 2 E Z 2 = 0, and EZ 2 = E Z 2. It follows that the argument of Z 2 is constant a.s., and thus (i) holds. Returning to Theorem 2.(iii), we can use the moments computed in Remark 2.3. The proposition shows that there really are oscillations, even with different normalizations, as soon as E( Z m E Z m ) 2 < E Z m E Z m 2 and E( Z m E Z m ) 3 0. It should be possible to verify this for all m 7, perhaps using asymptotical expansions for large m, but for simplicity we have resorted to numerical verification (by Maple) for m 00. We have also done the same for BST and Theorem 2.7(ii), using the moments given in Remark 2.9. We thus conclude the following result, showing that at least for these m, there are genuine oscillations. Theorem 6.2. For RRT, at least for 7 m 00, there are oscillations in Theorem 2.(iii); a n (X (m) 0 b n ) does not have a non-degenerate limit distribution for any sequence of norming constants a n 0 and b n. The same holds for BST, at least for 9 m 00. Remark 6.3. The fact that E( Z m E Z m ) 3 0 also implies by (6.3) that the subsequence limit X γ := Re(e iγ Z) has a non-zero third central moment, except for at most 6 values of γ [0,2π); in particular, X γ is not normal except possibly for a few exceptional γ. Presumably, these too could be eliminated by considering fourth or fifth moments, but we have not pursued that. References [] D. Aldous, The continuum random tree II: an overview. Stochastic Analysis (Proc., Durham, 990), 23 70, London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser. 67, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 99. [2] K.B. Athreya & S. Karlin, Embedding of urn schemes into continuous time Markov branching processes and related limit theorems. Ann. Math. Statist. 39 (968),

22 22 SVANTE JANSON [3] K.B. Athreya & P.E. Ney, Branching Processes. Springer, Berlin, 972. [4] S. Bernstein, Nouvelles applications des grandeurs aléatoires presqu indépendantes. (Russian) Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR Ser. Mat. 4 (940), [5] S. Bernstein, Sur un problème du schéma des urnes à composition variable. C. R. (Doklady) Acad. Sci. URSS (N.S.) 28 (940), 5 7. [6] M. Bousquet-Mélou & S. Janson, The density of the ISE and local limit laws for embedded trees. Preprint, arxiv:math.pr/ [7] B. Chauvin, M. Drmota & J. Jabbour-Hattab, The profile of binary search trees. Ann. Appl. Probab. (200), no. 4, [8] B. Chauvin, T. Klein, J.-F. Marckert & A. Rouault, Martingales and profile of binary search trees. Electron. J. Probab. 0 (2005), [9] B. Chauvin & N. Pouyanne, m-ary search trees when m 27: a strong asymptotics for the space requirements. Random Struct. Alg. 24 (2004), no. 2, [0] H.-H. Chern, M. Fuchs & H.-K. Hwang, Phase changes in random point quadtrees. Preprint, Available at [] H.-H. Chern & H.-K. Hwang, Phase changes in random m-ary search trees and generalized quicksort. Random Struct. Alg. 9 (200), no. 3 4, [2] D.S. Dean & S.N. Maumdar, Phase transition in a random fragmentation problem with applications to computer science. J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 35 (2002), L50 L507. [3] L. Devroye, Branching processes and their applications in the analysis of tree structures and tree algorithms. Probabilistic methods for algorithmic discrete mathematics, , eds. M. Habib et al., Algorithms Combin. 6, Springer, Berlin, 998. [4] M. Drmota & B. Gittenberger, On the profile of random trees. Random Struct. Alg. 0 (997), no. 4, [5] M. Drmota & H.-K. Hwang, Bimodality and phase transitions in the profile variance of random binary search trees, SIAM J. Discrete Math., 9 (2005), no., [6] M. Drmota& H.-K. Hwang, Profiles of random trees: correlation and width of random recursive trees and binary search trees. Adv. in Appl. Probab. 37 (2005), no. 2, [7] J. Fill & N. Kapur, Transfer theorems and asymptotic distributional results for m-ary search trees. Preprint, Available at [8] P. Flaolet & R. Sedgewick, Analytic Combinatorics. Book manuscript, August Available at [9] D.A. Freedman, Bernard Friedman s urn. Ann. Math. Statist. 36 (965), [20] B. Friedman, A simple urn model. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 2 (949), [2] M. Fuchs, H.-K. Hwang, & R. Neininger, Profiles of random trees: limit theorems for random recursive trees and binary search trees. Algorithmica, to appear. Available at [22] A. Gut, Probability: A Graduate Course. Springer, New York, [23] S. Janson, Limit theorems for certain branching random walks on compact groups and homogeneous spaces. Ann. Probab. (983), [24] S. Janson, Gaussian Hilbert Spaces. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 997. [25] S. Janson, Functional limit theorems for multitype branching processes and generalized Pólya urns. Stochastic Process. Appl. 0 (2004), no. 2, [26] S. Janson & R. Neininger, The size of random fragmentation trees. In preparation. [27] H. Kesten & B.P. Stigum, Additional limit theorems for indecomposable multidimensional Galton Watson processes. Ann. Math. Statist. 37 (966), [28] D.E. Knuth, The Art of Computer Programming. Vol. 3: Sorting and Searching. 2nd ed., Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 998. [29] W. Lew & H.M. Mahmoud, The oint distribution of elastic buckets in multiway search trees. SIAM J. Comput. 23 (994), no. 5,

23 CONGRUENCE PROPERTIES OF DEPTHS IN SOME RANDOM TREES 23 [30] G. Louchard, W. Szpankowski & J. Tang, Average profile of the generalized digital search tree and the generalized Lempel-Ziv algorithm. SIAM J. Comput. 28 (999), no. 3, [3] H.M. Mahmoud & B. Pittel, Analysis of the space of search trees under the random insertion algorithm. J. Algorithms 0 (989), no., [32] A. Meir & J.W. Moon, On the altitude of nodes in random trees. Canad. J. Math. 30 (978), [33] R.T. Smythe & H. Mahmoud, A survey of recursive trees. Theory Probab. Math. Statist. 5 (995), 27. Department of Mathematics, Uppsala University, PO Box 480, SE Uppsala, Sweden address: svante.anson@math.uu.se URL: